Intel is rumored to have warned its partners that mass shipments of its next-generation Ivy Bridge processors, which are expected to make their way into Apple's Mac lineup later this year, will not begin until after June, though a "small volume" of chips will reportedly go out in early April.

Sources from notebook players have told Taiwanese industry publication DigiTimes that both Intel and its first-tier notebook vendors have built up troubling inventories of the current-generation Sandy Bridge Processors. As a result, the Santa Clara, Calif., chipmaker "plans to delay mass shipments of the new processors to minimize the impact," according to the report.

Intel is still expected to announce the new line of processors and ship a "small volume" of them in early April, tipsters said. They also added that mass shipments would then arrive sometime "after June."

The report went on to claim that notebook vendors have begun adjusting their projects for Ivy Bridge-powered models in light of Intel's delay. Sources also reportedly told the publication that PC makers don't expect a "PC replacement trend" until Microsoft launches Windows 8 in late 2012.

"The first three quarters of 2012 will still be a dark period for the notebook industry," the report noted insiders as having said.

According to an alleged leaked roadmap that surfaced late last year, Intel's Ivy Bridge chip candidates for the MacBook Pro and MacBook Air had been tentatively scheduled for a May 2012 debut.

AppleInsider reported last week that Apple will conduct a top-to-bottom revamp of its notebooks lineup throughout 2012 that will bring its MacBook Pro portables more in line with the MacBook Air designs.

One person familiar with the new designs told AppleInsider that the new machines are "all going to look like MacBook Airs." Apple is expected to revamp the 15-inch MacBook Pro first, followed by the 17-inch model a few months later. The next-generation machines are expected to built around Intel's Ivy Bridge micro architecture and rely heavily on Thunderbolt. However, the company's naming system for the new laptops as yet remains unclear.

An illustration of Apple's notebook lineup planned for the 2012 calendar year.

Rumors out of Asia have also pointed to a new thin-and-light 15-inch MacBook model arriving in the first half of 2012. Last December, DigiTimes claimed Apple is readying a Retina Display-equipped 15-inch MacBook Pro for release in the second quarter of 2012.

Rumors out of Asia have also pointed to a new thin-and-light 15-inch MacBook model arriving in the first half of 2012. Last December, DigiTimes claimed Apple is readying a Retina Display-equipped 15-inch MacBook Pro for release in the second quarter of 2012.

Oh, THAT"S the one I want to replace my old 2006 MBP. Finally a serious portable CPU!

"That (the) world is moving so quickly that iOS is already amongst the older mobile operating systems in active development today." — The Verge

Isn't Digitimes the site that has been dead wrong so many times in the past?

They're a Taiwanese site. What the hell would they or any of their so-called sources know about Intel? And I wonder who their sources are, some janitor that works in one of the factories?

Many of their past rumors have been proven to be completely garbage and untrue. I wouldn't trust anything that is written on that site. At the end of December 2011, they claimed that 2 iPads were to be released in Jan 2012. Oh wait, it's February 2012 already. What a bunch of morons.

I'll eat my hat if Apple sticks a 45W TDP CPU in a 15" MacBook Pro that is as thin as a MacBook Air.

Something has to give, and in this case it would be the battery life.

Which actually brings up an interesting point... will this new range of MacBook Air-like MacBook Pro's not actually be as thin as a MacBook Air, or will be all be fitted with ULV CPU's?

Apple can follow the MBA design philosophy without making it a MBA. There is no reason they can't thin it out and tapper it but still allow enough room for a 35 and 45W CPUs. I think it's foolish to take one aspect of the MBA and then assume that the MBPs will get CULV processors. That's an amazing leap in logic.

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

I am waiting for Haswell, looks like Ivy wont be as good in graphics as first thought.

While Haswell will possibly give 5x or higher GFX performance then Sandy.

If we're talking about MBPs then it shouldn't be a big deal unless you really want integrated graphics. I figure the low-end 13" MBP will come with an IGP-only option. I assume most MBPs will have full dGPUs.

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Apple can follow the MBA design philosophy without making it a MBA. There is no reason they can't thin it out and tapper it but still allow enough room for a 35 and 45W CPUs. I think it's foolish to take one aspect of the MBA and then assume that the MBPs will get CULV processors. That's an amazing leap in logic.

Oh come on Solipsism, seriously???

The article states "all going to look like MacBook Airs", they have a picture captioned "An illustration of Apple's notebook lineup planned for the 2012 calendar year" with a 13" MBA up-sized to a 15.4 inch screen and the overwhelming differentiation point for a MBA is how thin and sleek the damn thing is.

Based on the above information how "foolish" can it possibly be to think that "one aspect" Apple might take from a MacBook Air is to, you know, make it look like a bloody MacBook Air??

The article states "all going to look like MacBook Airs", they have a picture captioned "An illustration of Apple's notebook lineup planned for the 2012 calendar year" with a 13" MBA up-sized to a 15.4 inch screen and the overwhelming differentiation point for a MBA is how thin and sleek the damn thing is.

Based on the above information how "foolish" can it possibly be to think that "one aspect" Apple might take from a MacBook Air is to, you know, make it look like a bloody MacBook Air??

What I'm saying (for the second time) is that I don't think Apple will be able to stick a 45W TDP CPU in 15.4" MacBook Pro style MacBook Air without sacrificing battery life.

If I'm correct it means:

This MacBook Pro will have a ULV CPU or

It won't actually be the equivalent of a 15.4" MBA (it will have to be thicker)

Show us the numbers of the internal space that suggest that Apple has to use a CULV processor.

Tell us how the 18"^3 of the ODD can't offset much of the battery space and allow for the logic board to be elongated so that it's against the back of the footprint where it's thickest and where the vents will be placed thus allowing for better cooling in a smaller space.

Tell us why it would have to be thicker despite the loss of the ODD saving plenty of internal space and allowing for easier engineering of the components.

Tell us why Apple would release a Pro machine that only has a 10 or 17W processor instead of the standard 35 or 45W processor.

Tell us why you think Apple can't follow the MBA's design without using CULV processors but was able to follow it in 2008 with the introduction of the unibody MBPs that also made the thickness thinner than the previous MBPs.

Tell us why Apple can't keep the back bottom chassis with as much internal vertical space as it currently has, use a milled top chassis for the LCD which thins out and strengthens the lid and tapers the chassis toward the front at the same angle as the MBA requires a CULV processor.

Tell me that you aren't basing your "sky is falling" FUD on some 50¢ mockups on a rumour site.

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

If we're talking about MBPs then it shouldn't be a big deal unless you really want integrated graphics. I figure the low-end 13" MBP will come with an IGP-only option. I assume most MBPs will have full dGPUs.

We'll see. The 13" MBP, as it stands, is Intel graphics only on both configurations, low and high-end. I think a lot of people would've preferred a more robust graphics processor to an OD, but it is difficult to guess what Apple has planned for the 13" MBP if the trend is towards the Air... adding dedicated graphics would eat into the space saved by dropping the OD, if it is getting "trimmed down" somehow.

I don't see a "very obvious" direction, but rather several "reasonable" possibilities for the 13".

We'll see. The 13" MBP, as it stands, is Intel graphics only on both configurations, low and high-end. I think a lot of people would've preferred a more robust graphics processor to an OD, but it is difficult to guess what Apple has planned for the 13" MBP if the trend is towards the Air... adding dedicated graphics would eat into the space saved by dropping the OD, if it is getting "trimmed down" somehow.

I don't see a "very obvious" direction, but rather several "reasonable" possibilities for the 13".

Maybe the 13" will not have the space or need in Apple's eyes for a dGPU but removing the ODD will make it a little easier to add one. Of course, that isn't the only consideration. Apple will obviously have to balance cot to price points, the ability to up-sell, and power requirements. It's quite possible Apple will lean to the cheaper, longer-lasting IGP for the 13" or even pull back the MBP line to just be the 15" and 17" models again.

The "very obvious" directions I see are...

removing the ODD

making the overall case thinner

making it taper to give an impression of it being thinner than before

having a 35/45W CPU in all models

having a dGPU in at least the 15" and 17" models

having a fast boot/wake SSD but also plenty of internal storage (whether that's an SSD card plus a 2.5" drive or a special hybrid 2.5" drive Apple got a patent for)

having at least an IPS display or a HiDPI display

non-soldered RAM

non-soldered SSD

about the same number of ports as your have now

USB 3.0 with the introduction of Ivy Bridge.

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Maybe the 13" will not have the space or need in Apple's eyes for a dGPU but removing the ODD will make it a little easier to add one. Of course, that isn't the only consideration. Apple will obviously have to balance cot to price points, the ability to up-sell, and power requirements. It's quite possible Apple will lean to the cheaper, longer-lasting IGP for the 13" or even pull back the MBP line to just be the 15" and 17" models again.

I feel in a sense they already have done so, in regard to graphics, anyway. If the 13" MBP persists it would seem that a dGPU would be a pretty obvious way to distinguish it from the 13" Air, and restore some of it's "Pro-ness."

I feel in a sense they already have done so, in regard to graphics, anyway. If the 13" MBP persists it would seem that a dGPU would be a pretty obvious way to distinguish it from the 13" Air, and restore some of it's "Pro-ness."

Maybe, but the 13" MBP also has a lot longer battery life and a lot more capacity than the 13" MBA. That's why I bought my 13" MBP. I just don't care about the GPU specs as I don't do any photo or video editing, don't play games, or anything else that would need to have it.

Note that the ODD in the 13" MBP takes up 25% of the internal space.

It gets very little and is prone to breaking as one of the few remaining components with moving parts. On top of that it generates a lot of hear and uses a lot of power when if use.

Also notice how the ODD forces engineers to restrict the logic board design and removes over 5" of useful port-side space because the ODD has to, obviously, be placed on an edge to be useful. A great many things open up with its removal. I can't wait for it to be gone.

Imagine this logic board elongated with half those ports moving to the other side of the machine. With the CPU and GPU pushed closer to the vents in the back closer to the vents where cooling can naturally be facilitated. That's the MBP I want.

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

We'll see come june... I'm not due for an upgrade, but I am itching for a 15" portable as the MBA is limiting in certain tasks (and not just graphics.)

I agree though, ditching the OD is not at all "risky" at this point.

I think, though, that soldered ram/ssd might become an Apple trend. Apple doesn't like people opening up their hardware. Solder everything on and you remove a major motivation to do so. You also setup an up-sell because people know they won't be able to upgrade later, so they are more likely to do it up front.

In the mobile space Apple has trended away from expandable memory, etc. and the Airs set a new precedent.

It will be interesting to see where they take things.

On your other points I am in agreement, except perhaps #10. Part of the reason for the "port crunch" on the Airs is the tapered design. Apple seems to be going "all-in" with Thunderbolt, although usb 3.0 adoption isn't out of the question.

I think, though, that soldered ram/ssd might become an Apple trend. Apple doesn't like people opening up their hardware. Solder everything on and you remove a major motivation to do so. You also setup an up-sell because people know they won't be able to upgrade later, so they are more likely to do it up front.

In the mobile space Apple has trended away from expandable memory, etc. and the Airs set a new precedent.

There is certainly an argument to be made that Apple will move their soldered RAM up the ladder and that they can benefit finically from this decision but I don't think that will happen. I certainly don't want it to happen either.

Quote:

On your other points I am in agreement, except perhaps #10. Part of the reason for the "port crunch" on the Airs is the tapered design. Apple seems to be going "all-in" with Thunderbolt, although usb 3.0 adoption isn't out of the question.

But tapering by itself doesn't mean you can't have ports, it just means that at some point on the tapering you lose side height that allows for port along every part of the edge.

Consider now, on the 13" MBP, that you have 5.5" of ports on the left side. Now this is sans a separate mic port which is now part of the headphone jack and the Kensington lock port is on the right side next to the ODD so let's round up to 6". Ignoring the questionable need of the SD card slot in 2012 that means you need 3" on each side for ports. Of course the headphone/mic port(s) and SD card slot are thin so they would go closest to the user.

The thickest port will be the ethernet port which can really only go on the back, right side of the chassis. But the MBAs can't deal with that because the chassis is too thin. If we assume that the MBPs will get a standard ethernet port then we assume that the chassis will have to be thicker than the MBA's chassis. Nothng wrong with that. It can still mean the new MBPs are thinner than the old MBPs.

Now consider the tapering that uses the same angle as the MBAs but starts off thicker at the back than the MBAs. That means you can add more ports to the side before you reach the point that it's too thin for ports. That should allow for 3" of ports on each side.

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

If I was Apple, I'd be kind of peeved that Intel is holding back CPU supplies just because my competitors can't make products people want to buy.

It has to be very irritating for Apple to be so dependent on Intel for the Mac. Apple is probably a long way from being able to design ARM processors that could displace Intel in the Mac, but I bet it's a longer term goal. Maybe it will happen in a 2016 timeframe.

If I was Apple, I'd be kind of peeved that Intel is holding back CPU supplies just because my competitors can't make products people want to buy.

It has to be very irritating for Apple to be so dependent on Intel for the Mac. Apple is probably a long way from being able to design ARM processors that could displace Intel in the Mac, but I bet it's a longer term goal. Maybe it will happen in a 2016 timeframe .

Unless Apple worked out some sort of deal with Intel to have the Ivy Bridge chips first. Not sure and I have no data to back that up but I;m sure Apple with their market dominance can work something like that out with Intel. The article didn't say there was any production issues or any technical issue with the delay but instead the abundance of the old inventory.

Tallest Skil:

"Eventually Google will have their Afghanistan with Oracle and collapse" "The future is Apple, Google, and a third company that hasn't yet been created."

Show us the numbers of the internal space that suggest that Apple has to use a CULV processor.

Tell us how the 18"^3 of the ODD can't offset much of the battery space and allow for the logic board to be elongated so that it's against the back of the footprint where it's thickest and where the vents will be placed thus allowing for better cooling in a smaller space.

Tell us why it would have to be thicker despite the loss of the ODD saving plenty of internal space and allowing for easier engineering of the components.

Tell us why Apple would release a Pro machine that only has a 10 or 17W processor instead of the standard 35 or 45W processor.

Tell us why you think Apple can't follow the MBA's design without using CULV processors but was able to follow it in 2008 with the introduction of the unibody MBPs that also made the thickness thinner than the previous MBPs.

Tell us why Apple can't keep the back bottom chassis with as much internal vertical space as it currently has, use a milled top chassis for the LCD which thins out and strengthens the lid and tapers the chassis toward the front at the same angle as the MBA requires a CULV processor.

Tell me that you aren't basing your "sky is falling" FUD on some 50¢ mockups on a rumour site.

Why are you having such a massive sook about this?

I'm not saying "the sky is falling", I'm just saying either:

Apple can't use the same 45W TDP as the current MacBook Pro --> OR <--

The new MacBook Pro can't be a 15" version of the MacBook Air as stated in this article, it has to be thicker.

I don't understand why you are whinging about what I said when two posts down you essentially say the exact same fucking thing... "the chassis will have to be thicker than the MBA's chassis"

Since you begged for some numbers here they are.

2011 MBA 45cui

2011 MBP 134cui

2012 MBP 70cui

That means the 2012 MBP would need to drop in volume by 48% to fit the up-sized MBA profile.

Ditching the ODD will get around 20%. If they solder the flash and RAM Apple might get another 10%. The relative internal space compared to the chassis width... maybe another 1-2%.

The only way to shave that much space is to shrink the battery, and the only way to shrink the battery and maintain an 8 hour battery life is to use lower TDP CPU's.

If Apple stick with the current 45W TDP I think the dimensions will be more like:

Height: 0.33-0.95 inch
Width: 14.8 inches
Depth: 9.82 inches

That is, the same height at the back as a 2011 MBP in a wedge down to three times the height of the front of a current MBA. The width can be pushed out a little but the depth stays the same as a 2011 MBP.

Maybe the 13" will not have the space or need in Apple's eyes for a dGPU but removing the ODD will make it a little easier to add one. Of course, that isn't the only consideration. Apple will obviously have to balance cot to price points, the ability to up-sell, and power requirements. It's quite possible Apple will lean to the cheaper, longer-lasting IGP for the 13" or even pull back the MBP line to just be the 15" and 17" models again.

The "very obvious" directions I see are...

removing the ODD

making the overall case thinner

making it taper to give an impression of it being thinner than before

having a 35/45W CPU in all models

having a dGPU in at least the 15" and 17" models

having a fast boot/wake SSD but also plenty of internal storage (whether that's an SSD card plus a 2.5" drive or a special hybrid 2.5" drive Apple got a patent for)

having at least an IPS display or a HiDPI display

non-soldered RAM

non-soldered SSD

about the same number of ports as your have now

USB 3.0 with the introduction of Ivy Bridge.

I think that's an accurate assessment, Doctor.

I concur.

My MBA maxed out on 'Trine 2' the other day. Those beautiful graphics did something that no other program has done until now, and an upgrade to a MBP just may be in order.

Steve Job's vision was so forward thinking that he used to park in disabled spots before he became sick.

I don't really get the hand-wringing about how close to the Air the 15" and 17" models seems a little silly. I think they got about three years out of the current unibody generation, a new design this year doesn't seem far-fetched. Removing the ODD would give it flexibility to add a slight taper, even if it only thins out the front edge, still leaving room for plenty of jacks, as many or few as they want. An ODD isn't very heavy though, about the weight of a regular candy bar. Notebook weight is largely limited by the weight of the battery, which weighs a few times that of an ODD.

But in short, Apple will produce what they want to produce, I'm interested in seeing what they have up their sleeves this time.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tallest Skil

Expected by whom? That looks pretty dumb to me. Apple made that mistake once before with the unibody transition. Did ANYONE actually buy the Late 2008 17" MacBook Pro, knowing what was coming?

Don't they all have integrated graphics? The difference being that the higher level models switch between integrated and discrete graphics?

I think the dread from most of us is that if they go the route of making the MBP too much like a MBA then the product will lose the dedicated graphics and some of the speed and horsepower that made it a "pro" machine.

Tallest Skil:

"Eventually Google will have their Afghanistan with Oracle and collapse" "The future is Apple, Google, and a third company that hasn't yet been created."

Apple can't use the same 45W TDP as the current MacBook Pro --> OR <--

The new MacBook Pro can't be a 15" version of the MacBook Air as stated in this article, it has to be thicker.

I don't understand why you are whinging about what I said when two posts down you essentially say the exact same fucking thing... "the chassis will have to be thicker than the MBA's chassis"

Since you begged for some numbers here they are.

2011 MBA 45cui

2011 MBP 134cui

2012 MBP 70cui

That means the 2012 MBP would need to drop in volume by 48% to fit the up-sized MBA profile.

Ditching the ODD will get around 20%. If they solder the flash and RAM Apple might get another 10%. The relative internal space compared to the chassis width... maybe another 1-2%.

The only way to shave that much space is to shrink the battery, and the only way to shrink the battery and maintain an 8 hour battery life is to use lower TDP CPU's.

If Apple stick with the current 45W TDP I think the dimensions will be more like:

Height: 0.33-0.95 inch
Width: 14.8 inches
Depth: 9.82 inches

That is, the same height at the back as a 2011 MBP in a wedge down to three times the height of the front of a current MBA. The width can be pushed out a little but the depth stays the same as a 2011 MBP.

Wasn't Apple working on better batteries that would allow higher energy densities and thinner battery packs at the same time? I remember reading about this a while ago.

Anyway, I have to agree with SolipsismX. I think it *is* possible to shrink the MBP to MBA-size, and still put a full-blown CPU/GPU combo in it that draws 45W. Removing the ODD will not only increase the chassis volume available for battery packs, but it would also allow a little more flexibility in terms of shape and location, which will probably help a little as well.

The CPU will not draw 45W all the time, and Ivy Bridge is supposed to not only improve power-per-watt in general, but also have improved dynamic frequency scaling and other power saving features. Add switchable graphics, and you could have a MBP that feels lightning quick at light use and still get 6 to 8 hours of battery life, but can also ramp up for heavy lifting and maybe only get 2 to 4 hours on full load.

Of course if you had a bigger chassis like the current MBP you could stuff even more batteries in it, and maybe get 6 hours under full load, but I think right now, Apple should be prepared to trade a little battery life for trimming down the chassis. I think that would be a perfectly fine tradeoff, since almost nobody is going to put a laptop under continuous full load while not connected to an outlet.

I think the dread from most of us is that if they go the route of making the MBP too much like a MBA then the product will lose the dedicated graphics and some of the speed and horsepower that made it a "pro" machine.

For all we know, that might happen, but this story isn't a valid source for that dread.

Sources from notebook players have told Taiwanese industry publication DigiTimes that both Intel and its first-tier notebook vendors have built up troubling inventories of the current-generation Sandy Bridge Processors. As a result, the Santa Clara, Calif., chipmaker "plans to delay mass shipments of the new processors to minimize the impact," according to the report.

Do I read this right? We've got so many of the old CPU chips that nobody wants anymore, that we've decided to delay the new chips until after you people have bought the old chips - that you no longer want.

I think the dread from most of us is that if they go the route of making the MBP too much like a MBA then the product will lose the dedicated graphics and some of the speed and horsepower that made it a "pro" machine.

"Pro" is just a marketing term. It has nothing whatsoever to do with anything in the real world.

Apple is expected to revamp the 15-inch MacBook Pro first, followed by the 17-inch model a few months later.

I really hope they don't do that. I know they've done this before but I hope this time we get a media event and they go "bang" here is a completely new design MBA/MBP in sizes 12" to 18".

I also hope they don't just do minor cosmetic changes. I'd like to see a different colour - maybe all black instead of silver/black, edge to edge screen with no black border, the MBP to adopt the non-glossy non-reflective MBA screen, ditch the horrible cut out below the trackpad, USB3.

I also hope they don't just do minor cosmetic changes. I'd like to see a different colour - maybe all black instead of silver/black, edge to edge screen with no black border, the MBP to adopt the non-glossy non-reflective MBA screen, ditch the horrible cut out below the trackpad, USB3.

Don't be so sure. Digitimes is not known for being reliable and for all we know that 'small volume' is the shipments to Apple which sucked up all the stock and it will take until June before there is more. It is the Apple style